Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
We? might finally be able to get Larry Scott fired
HillsboroDuck
Member Posts: 9,186
Sorry if this has already been poasted but ho. lee. shit.
Yahoo Sports exclusive: Document shows untrained 'third party' overruled controversial targeting call in Pac-12 game
On the final play of the third quarter of Washington State’s game at USC on Sept. 21, Trojan quarterback JT Daniels scrambled and ducked to a knee. After he’d established himself as down, Washington State linebacker Logan Tago dove at him headfirst and initiated clear helmet-to-helmet contact. The play drew both a flag for roughing the passer and a review for targeting.
It was a clear enough call that both the in-stadium replay officials and the replay officials in the Pac-12’s command center in San Francisco ruled the play as a targeting penalty, according to an internal replay report obtained by Yahoo Sports. This call would have ejected Tago from the game. An independent veteran official who viewed the play also told Yahoo Sports it was “clear targeting.”
Targeting wasn’t called and Tago stayed in the game. The replay report obtained by Yahoo Sports states that “unfortunately a third party did not agree” with the call. That “third party” was Pac-12 general counsel and senior vice president of business affairs Woodie Dixon, Yahoo Sports sources have confirmed.
Dixon oversees football for the conference but is not a formally trained official. Dixon telephoned in his opinion that the play wasn’t targeting, sources said. According to the report, his opinion overruled both the trained officials in the stadium replay booth and in the league’s command center.
The internal report was written by Gary McNanna, the replay official in the booth that night. His word choice indicates he was irked. (McNanna did not return calls from Yahoo Sports seeking comment.) The targeting call was obvious enough that ESPN analyst Greg McElroy used the word “shocked” once and some form of the word “surprise” three times when Tago didn’t get ejected. According to the document: “Both the replay booth and the command center agreed this was a targeting foul, but unfortunately a third party did not agree so the targeting was removed and we went with the ruling on the field of [roughing the passer] with no targeting. This didn’t play well on TV. Reversed my stoppage for [targeting] to not [targeting].”
The box labeled “Grader Comments” two slots over reads: “Correctly Handled.”
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott issued a statement to Yahoo Sports denying there was a “third party” involved, as Dixon is typically in the command center and part of the replay collaboration team, in part because he has a full understanding of targeting. “Our instant replay supervisor [Bill Richardson] is the ultimate decision maker,” Scott said. “The misperception that in this case, the ultimate decision from the command center was made by someone other than the instant replay supervisor is a concern.”
According to officiating experts and college sports officials, the documented “third party” interference undermines both the Pac-12 officiating credibility and rhetoric surrounding player safety that’s tied to the focus on targeting.
The “third party” interference sparked outrage in the officiating world, where a buzz quickly spread about the incident.
“It’s unheard of,” said Terry McAulay, the rules analyst for NBC who spent 10 years as a coordinator of officials for the Big East and AAC. “I was appalled when I heard. The autonomy of officiating needs to be absolute. When there’s pressure from the outside brought to bear, it threatens the integrity of the game.”
Four of the five major conferences – ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC – have some sort of replay center at their home offices to consult on calls during game days. The Big Ten is the only major conference that does not. Pac-12 officials confirmed Dixon has a voice in the room on game day, but cannot make final decisions. The other three leagues with review centers, according to officials in those leagues, do not give the executive in charge of football a voice in the on-field action.
Fox officiating expert Mike Pereira once worked as a consultant for the Pac-12 and said he never felt the pressure of outside interference from Dixon or Scott. But he agreed that the mere notion that someone from outside can influence the officiating crew is damning.
more
Yahoo Sports exclusive: Document shows untrained 'third party' overruled controversial targeting call in Pac-12 game
On the final play of the third quarter of Washington State’s game at USC on Sept. 21, Trojan quarterback JT Daniels scrambled and ducked to a knee. After he’d established himself as down, Washington State linebacker Logan Tago dove at him headfirst and initiated clear helmet-to-helmet contact. The play drew both a flag for roughing the passer and a review for targeting.
It was a clear enough call that both the in-stadium replay officials and the replay officials in the Pac-12’s command center in San Francisco ruled the play as a targeting penalty, according to an internal replay report obtained by Yahoo Sports. This call would have ejected Tago from the game. An independent veteran official who viewed the play also told Yahoo Sports it was “clear targeting.”
Targeting wasn’t called and Tago stayed in the game. The replay report obtained by Yahoo Sports states that “unfortunately a third party did not agree” with the call. That “third party” was Pac-12 general counsel and senior vice president of business affairs Woodie Dixon, Yahoo Sports sources have confirmed.
Dixon oversees football for the conference but is not a formally trained official. Dixon telephoned in his opinion that the play wasn’t targeting, sources said. According to the report, his opinion overruled both the trained officials in the stadium replay booth and in the league’s command center.
The internal report was written by Gary McNanna, the replay official in the booth that night. His word choice indicates he was irked. (McNanna did not return calls from Yahoo Sports seeking comment.) The targeting call was obvious enough that ESPN analyst Greg McElroy used the word “shocked” once and some form of the word “surprise” three times when Tago didn’t get ejected. According to the document: “Both the replay booth and the command center agreed this was a targeting foul, but unfortunately a third party did not agree so the targeting was removed and we went with the ruling on the field of [roughing the passer] with no targeting. This didn’t play well on TV. Reversed my stoppage for [targeting] to not [targeting].”
The box labeled “Grader Comments” two slots over reads: “Correctly Handled.”
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott issued a statement to Yahoo Sports denying there was a “third party” involved, as Dixon is typically in the command center and part of the replay collaboration team, in part because he has a full understanding of targeting. “Our instant replay supervisor [Bill Richardson] is the ultimate decision maker,” Scott said. “The misperception that in this case, the ultimate decision from the command center was made by someone other than the instant replay supervisor is a concern.”
According to officiating experts and college sports officials, the documented “third party” interference undermines both the Pac-12 officiating credibility and rhetoric surrounding player safety that’s tied to the focus on targeting.
The “third party” interference sparked outrage in the officiating world, where a buzz quickly spread about the incident.
“It’s unheard of,” said Terry McAulay, the rules analyst for NBC who spent 10 years as a coordinator of officials for the Big East and AAC. “I was appalled when I heard. The autonomy of officiating needs to be absolute. When there’s pressure from the outside brought to bear, it threatens the integrity of the game.”
Four of the five major conferences – ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC – have some sort of replay center at their home offices to consult on calls during game days. The Big Ten is the only major conference that does not. Pac-12 officials confirmed Dixon has a voice in the room on game day, but cannot make final decisions. The other three leagues with review centers, according to officials in those leagues, do not give the executive in charge of football a voice in the on-field action.
Fox officiating expert Mike Pereira once worked as a consultant for the Pac-12 and said he never felt the pressure of outside interference from Dixon or Scott. But he agreed that the mere notion that someone from outside can influence the officiating crew is damning.
more
Comments
PrayingDog.jpg they shove his racket up his fairy ass and send him packing. D. A. O.
However, the chancellors will bring the thunder once their admins print out the articles so they can read them
This is incompetence at every level.
But how is LarryScottFS a bad commissioner?
I think mass chincompetence is the easy answer here.
Our? presidents don't watch football so this won't be anything like it would be if it was a women's basketball violation.
They've made it incredibly clear that their mission is to promote olympic and womens sports, and he's been all about that.